The Offical Glasgow Celtic thread

[GiveItToTheShooters]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

1. No they weren't. Celtic have one European trophy, and rangers have 1 cup winners cup, which isn't the full European cup. So not the records of two European top performers.
2. This isn't true either, I found the link, you're basing this off attendances which is skewed in favour of clubs with the biggest stadiums. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/8l1laj/the_50_most_supported_clubs_in_europe_this_season/
Celtic do not have more fans than Liverpool or Chelsea.

Celtic have more European cups than Man City, arsenal and Spurs combined.

We all know that. But the statement was that they're European top performers. They aren't, they're abysmal in Europe.

[tonto1888]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

1. No they weren't. Celtic have one European trophy, and rangers have 1 cup winners cup, which isn't the full European cup. So not the records of two European top performers.
2. This isn't true either, I found the link, you're basing this off attendances which is skewed in favour of clubs with the biggest stadiums. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/8l1laj/the_50_most_supported_clubs_in_europe_this_season/
Celtic do not have more fans than Liverpool or Chelsea.

Celtic have more European cups than Man City, arsenal and Spurs combined.

We all know that. But the statement was that they're European top performers. They aren't, they're abysmal in Europe.

The statement was that they once were. Which is true in Celtics case at least

[GiveItToTheShooters]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

1. No they weren't. Celtic have one European trophy, and rangers have 1 cup winners cup, which isn't the full European cup. So not the records of two European top performers.
2. This isn't true either, I found the link, you're basing this off attendances which is skewed in favour of clubs with the biggest stadiums. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/8l1laj/the_50_most_supported_clubs_in_europe_this_season/
Celtic do not have more fans than Liverpool or Chelsea.

Celtic have more European cups than Man City, arsenal and Spurs combined.

We all know that. But the statement was that they're European top performers. They aren't, they're abysmal in Europe.

The statement was that they once were. Which is true in Celtics case at least

When? When they won it 50 odd years ago? Winning one European cup doesn't mean you're a top European performer.

[tonto1888]

They won it in 67. Beaten finalists in 70 and made the semi finals in 72 and 74. I'd call that top performing.

[bannside]

Plus....went toe to toe with Porto in the Europa League final..losing 3-2 in a cliffhanger. Porto franked the form 12 months later winning the CL.

[trailer]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

Deluded. Absolutely deluded.

[screenexile]

Plus....went toe to toe with Porto in the Europa League final..losing 3-2 in a cliffhanger. Porto franked the form 12 months later winning the CL.

Wow Celtic were alright 20 years ago and even better 50 years ago fair play!!

[tonto1888]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

Deluded. Absolutely deluded.

Another person who doesn't know anything

[tonto1888]

Plus....went toe to toe with Porto in the Europa League final..losing 3-2 in a cliffhanger. Porto franked the form 12 months later winning the CL.

Wow Celtic were alright 20 years ago and even better 50 years ago fair play!!

What exactly is your argument here

[GiveItToTheShooters]

Sooo record is 1 European cup 50 odd years ago. Been anonymous ever since.
Abysmal European performers would be more apt.

[trailer]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

Deluded. Absolutely deluded.

Another person who doesn't know anything

1 (one) European trophy in 60 something years. Clearly the record of European Giants. 

[Wildweasel74]

Yes before the majority of us were even born

[tonto1888]

Sooo record is 1 European cup 50 odd years ago. Been anonymous ever since.
Abysmal European performers would be more apt.

Got to the final abs two semi finals in the few years after 1967. Hardly anonymous is it

[tonto1888]

It would be as successful as Italy entrance into the 6 nations in rugby.

Italy can't buy players.

If this did get off the ground - the "founding members" would have the pick of the world's best players between them.

Founding members can't get relegated either, so a couple of years at the bottom wouldn't be the end of the world.

It would be a complete and utter gamechanger. But a long way off!

They might ask Linfield then....

😂 I'll take the bait MR, and I'm not even a Celtic fanatic.
Nobody's pretending Celtic and Rangers are top European performers , but they once were. Even now , They are the 9th and 22nd best supported clubs in Europe respectively. The fact that they have very little competition in Scotland , and massive financial discrepancy between EPL and SPL has stifled their progress recently. An injection of cash and more competitive games would build on the very secure base of their tradition and massive support . On purely business perspective , I doubt this super league will be treating Celtic with the derision you do MR. Celtic for example , are better supported than fellow European champions , Liverpool, Man City and Chelsea. It would be guaranteed full houses for all games in Glasgow and the marketing potential of one of sports most famous rivalries would be massive attraction as part of this business model.

Deluded. Absolutely deluded.

Another person who doesn't know anything

1 (one) European trophy in 60 something years. Clearly the record of European Giants.

I will refer you to my previous comment

[ned]

This is about a club's potential to be a top European club. Celtic have that potential if allowed to play outside of the Scottish leagues.
Fan base is massive worldwide. Obviously not on a par with Barca, Real, Bayern, Utd or Juventus but given a more even playing field they have a chance of being in that second or third echelon of teams. Who knows from there?
Where were Spurs, Man City or Chelsea pre Premier League?